• sirdorius@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      From the languages I know, that comma completely changes the meaning of the phrase. But I’ve seen some examples in German using some very weird commas, so maybe it’s a language thing?

      • sirdorius@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        So in German the phrase would go like “You prove, that I can’t fly” so I’m guessing the author omitted ‘that’ for brevity

        /end over analysis

  • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Religious people even made up a special word so they wouldn’t have to think of themselves as gullible.

    Faith

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I never bought into presuppositionalism. You can act like you know something with zero confidence or even the ability to know what confidence is.

        A plant knows how to grow to light.

      • CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I like to think of science as conservation of faith, an attempt to explain as much as possible while having faith in as few initial postulates as possible.

        • visak@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s not faith. That’s just pragmatism. A set of models which predict the observed world with the fewest number of theories will be the most easily understood and the most easily extended. However seeking simplicity does not mean that there is a simple answer.

          • CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m not refering to faith in the religious sense just faith in the sense of believing something that cannot be proven, in the case of science this is purely pragmatic such as faith that our senses provide a useably accurate picture of reality and that every other person isn’t lying to us. It is however still a form of faith.

            • visak@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I, a curious person and budding scientist, want to understand more of the world I observe. I make a starting assumption, that it’s possible to create a usefully predictive model.

              I dream up a model, then I create a set of hypotheses to test the predictions of my model. If my predictions match my observations I say that I have created a useful model. Although you hear people talk about theories being proven, if you peel back what’s actually happening it’s just creating models. If over the course of all my efforts I never create a useful predictive model I may have disproved my starting assumption that modeling is possible. But we have ample evidence that it is.

              Here’s an example of a model we know to be untrue (or more correctly incomplete) but which we still use: Newtonian Mechanics. NASA does not need to involve Relativity to send a probe to Mars and have it get there as planned. Because the space-time in which the probe operates is simple enough that Newtonian math is sufficient. But we also have a better model: General Relativity. We have not thrown out Newtonian because its still a useful model provided you know it’s limits. Newtonian assumes absolute time and Galilean Invariance. Both models assume the gravitational constant G doesn’t change. When/if they find evidence of that we’ll need new models.

              The idea that the universe, or every other person is not lying to us as you said, is not faith. Just another assumption.

              There’s no faith here. Just a process. The critical difference between this process and faith is that it MUST be constantly tested and discarded if it does not work.

    • Sloth@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Flies

      Hmm ok so maybe you can fly. Maybe it was a fluke.

      Flies a bunch of times

      We may have a hypothesis here.

      Flies without fail a million times

      Ok we are pretty certain you can fly, let’s call it a theory. But hey, we don’t know the full picture here, let’s leave the possibility open that you can’t fly and we just don’t understand things completely here.

        • Comment105@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Sounds like a fundamental misunderstanding of the role of uncertainty. But I’m an undereducated dilletant, so I’m not sure I have a solid grasp on the fundamentals either.

  • tate@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Just nitpicking here: science can never prove anything.

    In the second panel the guy on the right acquires evidence that is consistent with the guy on the left having the ability to fly. The fact that he even asked for proof shows that he is not engaged in science here.

  • JunctionSystem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Lucifer: In our non-canon continuation to this comic, the “I can fly!” guy is launched from a trebuchet over the Grand Canyon.

  • mikeyBoy14@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    35
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Since he can actually fly, this implies that his religious beliefs are true…

    Edit: I love the irony of a subreddit against religion trying to collectively reinforce that there is only one true interpretation of a comic.

    • Izzgo@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It was the scientist who proved he could fly. The religious person made the same claim but didn’t even try to prove it.

      • mikeyBoy14@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        20
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        But the scientist and the religious person are shown to be identical, and the first row showed that he could fly. I.e., the claim that he refused to prove was implied to be true, regardless of his refusal to prove it.

        • Leraje@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          1 year ago

          You’re interpreting the artwork too literally. I think the creator was just trying to save themselves a bit of drawing time.

            • Rachelhazideas@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              1 year ago

              Let’s be generous and say it’s the same person. You’re saying that the attitude of this person is rational, let alone deserving of worship?

              You seem to be under the impression that athiests are all the same in that they just don’t get that god actually exists.

              Most of us don’t believe a compassionate, omnipotent, and omniscient exists. God, if it is everything the bible says, has murdered far more innocent people than the average athiest. Even if it exists, most of us still wouldn’t worship such a wretched disgusting thing.

              • mikeyBoy14@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Christ man all I did was point out that the comic’s internal logic was an awkward fit for its theme.

                • Phlogiston@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  It’s common for comics like this to reuse frames to reenforce that point that “everything else being the same” these two ways off responding to the first frame are fundamentally different. It’s not common to read the frames as all four of them happening in series.

                  I agree, If we read them the way you suggest the meaning is less clear. Is flying proof of religion? Nope! It’s proof that this person can fly. What it does do though is provide a case of potential “supernatural” that can be explored for more information. What if he flew using fairy dust … does that prove Catholicism?

                • Rachelhazideas@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Funny how fast you clutch your pearls as soon as an ounce of good faith was given to your argument that had so little relevancy to the point of the comic.

                  Acting offended doesn’t make you correct, it makes you hypocritical.

                • rambaroo@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  It is. It’s surprising to me how defensive people are getting over a comic. Flying is an obvious stand-in for the left character’s beliefs, so the people acting like you can’t treat it literally are just being intentionally obtuse. This thread feels like reddit all over again, and that’s not a good thing.

            • Leraje@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s a meme. If you’re expecting a dead on accurate reflection of reality, you’re looking at the wrong media format.

              • mikeyBoy14@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                1 year ago

                I love the irony of a subreddit against religion trying to collectively reinforce that there is only one true interpretation of a comic. And discrediting contrary viewpoints without addressing the underlying logic.

                We’re an odd species, aren’t we?

                • Leraje@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I mean, it’s a meme community reacting to a meme where both the inference and message are crystal clear - how many interpretations and how much logic can there actually be?

                • Rachelhazideas@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  The greatest irony here is you pushing your view points into other people and calling anything you disagree with a logical fallacy. Not everything you don’t understand or disagree with is a logical fallacy.

                  Ending your sentence with a trite saying implying that people are odd for calling out your hypocrisy doesn’t make you sound wise, it makes you sound insufferable.

    • Platomus@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Which religious beliefs are true?

      This meme didn’t show any religious beliefs.

      It shows the religious thought process.